Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Cliff Hucker Date: Jun 17, 2010 2:35am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I hear you, Chappy

I wonder why...

http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=295596

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: johnnyonthespot Date: Jun 17, 2010 10:54am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I hear you, Chappy

wow, ok. Missed that one. 70's musically retarded compared to the 80's, that's .. well hard to come up with a response for without reusing the word retarded

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Longnstrange Date: Jun 17, 2010 11:38am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I hear you, Chappy

Well, this is actually the correct use of the word, and not just kids calling each other 'retards'. I believe that the band improved musically with time. Blowing your mind on acid and playing a million notes all over the place is musically retarded compared to what the Dead did in their later years. They settled down and became a beautiful creature reather than a sensationalistic noise factory. That's right, Phil going woop woop on his bass is musically retarded compared to the way he playes the six string in the later years. It is much easier to slide up and down strings than to really work a jam. Well, anyway, I use the term to express a true belief that the music evolves. If I'm going to call names, I'll say "poopy face". Did I mention how much I love this stuff today?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: johnnyonthespot Date: Jun 17, 2010 12:01pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I hear you, Chappy

well we all have our opinions and I don't want to pick a fight but I do firmly believe the 70's was their peak. Doesn't mean I don't still like what they did after or that they didn't do anything new or interesting. Personally I like the tone of Phil's bass more when he did it with just 4 strings. The fact that the new material became way less and less as the years went by kind of proves to me their creative peak had diminished.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jun 17, 2010 12:38pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I hear you, Chappy

Theoretically, at least, a decreasing amount of new material doesn't have to mean a decline in creativity. It's possible to decrease one's output because one is concentrating on doing things differently or better. More isn't necessarily better. Just making a theoretical argument here ...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: johnnyonthespot Date: Jun 17, 2010 12:58pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I hear you, Chappy

perhaps but how many artist can you name where that isn't the case?

not saying look at so and so they are or were still putting out good stuff. Generally they seem to go hand and hand

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Arbuthnot Date: Jun 17, 2010 3:36pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I hear you, Chappy

i agree that it's hard to burn with a creative fire after a certain amount of years (i put it at 7 years for bands/musicians) in the trenches; and yet some artists do still in their later years have an appeal, and i'll listen to them, even though they might not stretching the artistic canvas as much if at all, but generally speaking, if i look over all the musicians that i've enjoyed listening to throughout my life, it's primarily their earlier output that thrills me, and which i primarily listen to; a few exceptions of course, and we've posted about this in the past, as you know, so no need to do so now, but i just wanted to make that point

i listened to a couple of shows from '83 last week, enjoyed them well enough, but absolutely in no way did i enjoy them as even near the enjoyment level of a show from the band's earlier, more creative years; these are my preferences and tastes, others have their own

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Jun 18, 2010 5:58am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I hear you, Chappy

Interesting as seven years was just about the time that the Beatles started to go in their own directions. Did you use them as your benchmark in this analysis?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Arbuthnot Date: Jun 18, 2010 3:07pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I hear you, Chappy

i had no idea of that time-frame in reference to the Beatles, altho it makes sense thinking about it; i'm not certain how i originally arrived at the year 7, i've been using that number for well over twenty years, and so back then, in the faded past, i must have got out my graphs and rulers and thinking cap and got to work and came up with that number...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jun 17, 2010 6:11pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I hear you, Chappy

Like I say, it was theoretical ... I'll have to think on it some more and figure out if I can defend it ...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: johnnyonthespot Date: Jun 17, 2010 6:55pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I hear you, Chappy

I think Dudley did a pretty good job - I like his point about Dylan. Clearly his 60's output was his creative peak but that is not to say he didn't create anything worthwhile after but that was still his peak.

http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=310705

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Jun 18, 2010 3:18am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: I hear you, Chappy

Agree...

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)